# Single Malt and Single barrel



## zemekone (Aug 1, 2004)

First what is the differnce between single malt whiskey and single barrel whiskey? Which one does everyone reccomend, and what brand?


----------



## PaulMac (Jul 15, 2003)

zemekone said:


> First what is the differnce between single malt whiskey and single barrel whiskey? Which one does everyone reccomend, and what brand?


A single malt is a scotch made from malt whisky from one distillery...not from one year as many believe, age statement is the youngest whisky in the bottle....vatted malt (they changing it to some balls ass confusing title I cant recall off the top of my head) is a blend of malt whiskys from sevreal distilleries...blended whisky is from serveral distilleries with alcohol from other grains added...single barrel is whisky from just that, a single barrel, usually bottled at cask strength, very limited, often expensive
for a single barrel whisky you average 200-250 bottles per barrel, less if really old. Also there is much more variation in a single barrel, single malts are made to taste as similar as possible. Single malts are much easier to recommend, cause you have an expectation, single barrel, unless you had same barrel, its tough to say...hope that covers it, if ya need more say so lol

PaulMac


----------



## cmiller (Sep 8, 2005)

As a bit of Triva:

whiskey (with an "e") is burbon
whisky (without an "e") is scotch

I have seen a bottle of Johnnie Walker Blue Label locally for $210. And it is still a blended whisky.


----------



## catfishm2 (Nov 6, 2004)

Just finished a bottle of Evan Williams SB Vintage 1995. One of the better bourbons that I've ever had.


----------



## rjose (Jul 7, 2005)

cmiller said:


> As a bit of Triva:
> 
> whiskey (with an "e") is burbon
> whisky (without an "e") is scotch
> ...


Not true. The "e" depends on where it was made generally. Canada and Scotland don't use the "e", Ireland does, most of the time the US makers don't but a few do. Bourbon is wiskey made with at least 51% corn in the grain mash and are generally from Kentucky.


----------



## punch (Mar 5, 2005)

zemekone said:


> . . . Which one does everyone reccomend, and what brand?


I like the single barrel bourbons. I also like them barrel proof. My favorite is the original, Bookers (running anywhere from 121 - 126 proof, depending on the barrel). I'm also a sucker for Knob Creek bourbon. The main thing that I like about the single barrel bourbons is that they tend to be of a higher proof than the blends (although this is not always the case). I like the taste of the stuff straight up. I don't need to pay anyone to put water in it for me. The thing I like the most about Bookers is that it is right from the barrel, no added water and no filtering. Pure Kentuk' gold.

As to single malt whiskey, I'm not a big fan. These seem to be the current yuppie trend. I'd rather spend the money on a good cognac.


----------



## Braxxy (Apr 1, 2005)

I think martini's are still the yuppie trend, good scotch has been around for hundreds of years and can not really be called a trend. Good scotch with a good cigar probably came around soon after.


----------



## PaulMac (Jul 15, 2003)

Braxxy said:


> I think martini's are still the yuppie trend, good scotch has been around for hundreds of years and can not really be called a trend. Good scotch with a good cigar probably came around soon after.


Actually, Single malt scotches can be called a trend, pre WWII, there were not many single malts at all, almost all whisky was used in blends. With the continuing growth of the large companies, a few independant bottlers decided to start bottling as a single malt. The success was noticed, and now every year there are more single malts bottled.

not saying good scotch can't be blended, just saying single malts are much more popular than they were previously

Paul


----------



## Blueface (May 28, 2005)

For around $40, can never go wrong with Jack Daniels single barrel.


----------



## Braxxy (Apr 1, 2005)

Well just looking at bottles in my home The Glenlivet has a date of 1824 and Glenfiddich has a date of 1887 and the website for Macallan says the distillery was founded in 1824. Those are my usual brands. So all I am saying I suppose is that if it is a trend, it certainly has some staying power.


----------



## PaulMac (Jul 15, 2003)

Braxxy said:


> Well just looking at bottles in my home The Glenlivet has a date of 1824 and Glenfiddich has a date of 1887 and the website for Macallan says the distillery was founded in 1824. Those are my usual brands. So all I am saying I suppose is that if it is a trend, it certainly has some staying power.


like I said, the distilleries been around forever, but not single malts...which is what most people want these days. Many folks turn there noses up at blends entirely...leaves more for me lol


----------



## mosesbotbol (Sep 21, 2005)

Prince Charles prefers blended scotch to single malts. I like blended scotch too, it's much more of an art to create also.


----------



## PaulMac (Jul 15, 2003)

mosesbotbol said:


> Prince Charles prefers blended scotch to single malts. I like blended scotch too, it's much more of an art to create also.


I drink some blends but I not really fond of most...generic grain alcohol being added kinda turns me off lol, but there are some fantastic vatted malts out there. And technically, EVERY whisky is a blend, single malts are blends of different years from a single distillery, and vatted is a blend of multiple distilleries.


----------



## punch (Mar 5, 2005)

Braxxy said:


> I think martini's are still the yuppie trend, good scotch has been around for hundreds of years and can not really be called a trend. Good scotch with a good cigar probably came around soon after.


You must hang around with a different group of yuppies.  Scotch has been around forever, but the single malt craze is a rather new trend. I can remember back to the days when you could not find a single malt in any local liquor store. Now, the one I frequent has more single malts than bourbons. Heresy!!!!!!!! Anyway, there are a few good single malts out there. Most are too expensive for what I think you are getting. Of course, that makes them perfect to go with most of the designer cigars out there! Give me a good old Punch and a Kentucky bourbon (preferably around 100 proof. I'll add my own water, thank you.), and I am as close to heaven as I'll probably ever get.

PS - I swear that some people just get a woody walking into a bar and asking, just loud enough that everyone can hear, for a Glenkinchie or a Bladnoch or Lagavulin, and then acting shocked when the bartender tells them they've already had too much to drink because he can't understand what they are saying. You sure you don't want a Budweiser? :al


----------



## mosesbotbol (Sep 21, 2005)

punch said:


> PS - I swear that some people just get a woody walking into a bar and asking, just loud enough that everyone can hear, for a Glenkinchie or a Bladnoch or Lagavulin, and then acting shocked when the bartender tells them they've already had too much to drink because he can't understand what they are saying. You sure you don't want a Budweiser? :al


I use to be all over the Lagavulin, but now it's just too much peet and I prefer Talisker. I prefer Bourbon to Scotch in general, as well as dark rum if I am going to neat drinks.

Congac and Kirsch are a different story. :al


----------



## Braxxy (Apr 1, 2005)

Well I do live in Yuppie central and trust me Martini's are still the "it" drink, Cosmo's for the gals of course. Yuppettes if you will


----------



## punch (Mar 5, 2005)

Braxxy said:


> Well I do live in Yuppie central and trust me Martini's are still the "it" drink, Cosmo's for the gals of course. Yuppettes if you will


I see that you live in NYC. That explains a lot. It takes a good 20 years for the latest fashions from NY to make it to Omaha! Well, maybe ten years . . .


----------

